I find myself troubled at some of the recent events surrounding the Republican nomination process and the nominees behavior. First let me preface this by noting I'm trying not to be critical, but I do see some serious flaws in the thought process here and they must be brought to light. Secondly, I'm not yet committed to anyone candidate, so this isn't meant to be a promotion to lobby a cause. Okay here's the problem....
Recently the pack of contenders have exposed some thinking that makes me question their ability to turn around the decline our nation is facing. Problem solvers and visionaries use a process called systematic thinking. Systematic thinking is the discipline of seeing the wholes. It's the ability to see interrelationships in the process of change rather than a "snapshot" of linear thinking. This is critical to the decision making process, and an absolute must for the next leader of our great nation. Allow me to cite the current example that has me troubled.
Mitt Romney has been involved with a venture capital group that has made him a great deal of money. They are being called out for investing in trouble businesses, making changes, and gambling those decisions will turn the company around and make it profitable. The critics are using a linear thought process that looks something like this....
Romney invests = people lose jobs = Romney makes money off the backs of the less fortunate.
While that plays on the sympathies of those who are struggling to make a paycheck, it's a very narrow minded view of the process and is an enabling excuse for those who don't understand that carefully planned work and patiently executed plans are not luck.
Those who understand systematic thinking might look at that process like this.
1) Company is in trouble because of various factors.
2) Factors are analyzed and risks weighed.
3) A plan for reorganization is placed on the table and approved by the potential investors
4) Struggling company is purchased and saved from bankruptcy
5) Unnecessary or ineffective employees and assets are disposed of creating an efficient and profitable company.
6) The jobs and income of those effective at their positions are saved and not lost to mismanagement.
7) Mitt Romney and his fellow risk takers receive financial reward.
8) Go back to #1 and repeat.
This has been a process of systematic thinking that has made Mitt Romney a wealthy individual. It's also caused a firestorm of criticism for exactly the same reason. Now I'm not a Mitt Romney fan but isn't the country similar to a bankrupt company teetering on the edge of ruin? Aren't some hard choices going to have to be made in the very near future? Isn't a systematic plan going to be more effective than a linear thought process? Here we are again making a villain out of someone who has proven himself successful. I find it funny that those pointing the fingers lack the financial success of Mitt, and are struggling to keep their campaigns afloat monetarily. Isn't having the "fruit on the tree" an example of successful thinking? I'm thinking his opponents would do better to find some other issue to attack rather than, "he's become wealthy using solid systematic success principles." You know, like the ones that might come in handy rebounding this great nation from financial ruin? This narrow minded, linear thought process exposed by other candidates has me rethinking their capabilities. I daresay it's going to take quite a bit more than out debating the current President to get our country back on track. I really hope the presidential field rethinks this plan of attack, and shows us they understand systems thinking.